Do journalists think about what they're writing? 'Cuz here's one portion of the story:

-- Presidential debates don't matter much in making up voters' minds.
Sixty-two percent said the debates wouldn't have an impact on their
decisions. Twenty-three percent said the debates made them more likely
to vote for Romney, 14 percent for Obama.

I can see what the reporter means. She's just trying to express the fact that 62% of voters claim to be not much affected by debates. But if 23% moved to Romney and 14% to Obama, that's a net switch of 9 points to Romney because of the debates. Was Obama ever ahead in Ohio by nine points? In politics, that's HUGE, and the truth is precisely the opposite: the Presidential debates made all the difference.

It would have been more accurate to say, "Presidential debates are an important factor in decision making for roughly a third of voters."

I doubt that's an instance of spin. More likely just sloppy summarizing on a deadline. But still, does no one think?